Here is all the info ive collected on the equipment and a ton of other sh1t that you can choose to believe or not but its all realRemoteNeuralManipulation .Weebly.com

Involves Parametric Speakers Voice to Skull Voice Synth and runs on radio waves which can carry electricity that the mind then converts firing neurons to cause the exact neuron firings the brain would undergo in any situation youre being forced to experience radio waves and the brain waves both are electromagnetic radiation even what you see through your eyes is processed by the brain as electrical impulses all of this equipment is referenced in buyable store equipment minus v2k which you can build via schematic and of course none has made an rf to brain transmitter device (the brain wouldnt need anything beyond nature to act as a reciever)

do note these are not neighbours i had the same opening scam that moved to street theater to cops to government to illuminati to aliens they will always have a new backstory that is bullshit and have given up minus sitting around being childish as possible telling my brain to feel anger at the dumbest sh1t even the torture attacks stop when they realise you are a silent unbreakable individual

-If the brain processes it then it can be decoded with brain mapping and an AI (the brain obviously processes everything)

Unlike a computer, the human brain cannot encode and decode spontaneous holographic memories and require some time to consolidate fresh informations into its firmware (hippocampus). I really think the brain is a amazing thing, but I still don't believe it has the capacity to communicate and exchange information in the wild without a precise neurological function.

I think it's not real. But brain caps aren't in direct contact and they still work. And AI is not capable enough (yet) to read your troughts using just brainwaves.

I disagree. There's multiple ways to read/record and modify neuronal activity remotely. This technology and science doesn't require specifically that thoughts or consciousness could even notice how the brain may process psychocognitive informations.

I'm still waiting for you to explain how such brain activity can be recorded remotely (sans implants or other devices on or near the brain or head).

No implants, electrodes, or sensors are required for modern ultrasonic/transcranial neuromonitoring of EEG signals in the cerebral cortex, hippocampus, striatum, and hippothalamus. The same concepts in ultrasonic neuromodulation also applies to remote neuromonitoring of neuronal activity in order to record/monitor evoked potentials in the brain with short ultrasonic signals greater than 20kHz.

No implants, electrodes, or sensors are required for modern ultrasonic/transcranial neuromonitoring of EEG signals in the cerebral cortex, hippocampus, striatum, and hippothalamus.

I would like to see a link from a reputable source supporting this claim. In particular, I want a reputable source showing that a device capable of remotely monitoring brain activity exists and has definitively demonstrated its capability already. In other words, I don't want something that is purely theoretical.

No implants, electrodes, or sensors are required for modern ultrasonic/transcranial neuromonitoring of EEG signals in the cerebral cortex, hippocampus, striatum, and hippothalamus. The same concepts in ultrasonic neuromodulation also applies to remote neuromonitoring of neuronal activity in order to record/monitor evoked potentials in the brain with short ultrasonic signals greater than 20kHz.

There's a few good reasons why you're still on my ignore list. One of them is simply because you lack the capacity to use the internet to retrieve posted evidences and references of peer-reviewed studies about this.

There's a few good reasons why you're still on my ignore list. One of them is simply because you lack the capacity to use the internet to retrieve posted evidences and references of peer-reviewed studies about this.

tk

The reason I can't use the net to read those references is simple.You have not made any reference to them.So, what are you waiting for?Post the references.

Do you understand the difference between posting the data and posting a link?

The reason I ask is that I can't actually find any evidence supporting your suggestions and the comments from others suggest that they can't either.So while it's possible that we are all thick, it's much more likely that you are talking nonsense again.

Your refusal to supply any references backing up your position certainly supports that idea.